Zerg2905: OK, thank you.And now for something completely different*: where is the "crushing" superiority of the Sony sensors (Nikon and Sony cameras), in RAW, ISO 6400, bulb???
* = courtesy of Monty Python.
Aha, thank you, I was not aware of that, just assumed that all Nikons have (now) Sony sensors. My mistake.
OK, thank you.And now for something completely different*: where is the "crushing" superiority of the Sony sensors (Nikon and Sony cameras), in RAW, ISO 6400, bulb???
Zeisschen: Canon is seriously going to sell this huge Super 35 (wide APS-C crop) camera for 5.500 bucks?
The video specs look like those of any medium range mirrorless cameras like Sony a6000. Is there anything I missed?
Is all that extra price tag for video features no available in most DSLR like Zebra and Focus peaking, a standard on any mirrorless 500$ camera?
No 4k, not even via external recorder? In times where you can get Blackmagic 4k or Full Frame Sony A7s cameras for half the money with better IQ? A GH4 with 4k and probably similar IQ for just 1500 bucks? Seriously??
This company is insane!! I mean they must live inside a cave in their own stone age!
Well, my 1987 (no kidding, the black / white box thing with a red LED) Walkman also works fine, together with a pile of Philips (or BASF) CCs. But if you want to compare apples with pears, I'm also fine with that.Edit: sorry, it is 1984, not 1987.
Donnie G: Pixel peep all you want gang, this camera will make money for the professionals who use it and the rental houses who stock it. Its a small, lightweight, infinitely customizable, industrial strength body with AF that's supported by the largest selection of modern lenses the world has ever known, and that makes it a very cost effective tool for professional productions. Of course if you're not a pro, then none of that would matter to you. Different strokes!
@Donnie, even if he works for Canon (or not): your answer is good, but not for people worshiping brands, or pixels, or DxO, or whatever. I want to see movies at home on a 21:9 format, with a native effective resolution of 5120 X 2160, but that's not quite the standard of today. Therefore, 4K is also nonsense, as it is still an ugly 16:9, and you will have your top / bottom black bars. So, no matter of how good or bad this camera is, let's discuss movie formats first. And what kind of sensors will be needed. And then start to judge the rest of the features and say Sony>Canon, Arri>Sony etc...
P. S.: the majority of my so called hi-fi Sony equipment died. Some old Philips amps however work just fine. Pick a conclusion. If you think Sony is the greatest kid on the block fine with me.
Yes, it will. For a couple of reasons. It seems it is a good pro camera for those who know how to extract 100% from it. I, for instance, don't know (and don't know much about video in general), but I have asked people who earn their living from this.
marcio_napoli: Typical DP review crowd. They all look for specs, actually knowing very little how to use it in the real world.
It's just about numbers, on gear heads minds: DR numbers, MP numbers, ISO numbers, and now, 2k vs 4k.
In just a few years, 4k vs 8k... numbers, bla bla bla, numbers.
If my statement above doesn't cut it, the mighty ARRI Alexa is a 2k camera only.
Do you know what the "obsolete" 2k Arri Alexa means to the movie industry? It's basically the most acclaimed digital movie camera ever.
And guess what, few, very few Hollywood level movies are actually produced in 4k.
Very, very few.
If Hollywood is not ready yet for 4k, do we really think a bunch of gear heads on DP review are really in THAT need for 4k ?
@Marcio: 100% accurate, in my opinion.
Wow, this is not 16K! In 2014! And the features / price ratio: outrageous...
I'm sure this can handle the Sigma 200-500... Now that's...tough!
This is NASA. I still use airplanes...
cpkuntz: Typical Canon dull colors, plastic skin, mushy details, and blown highlights. In 2012 these sensors were badly beaten. Now they are embarrassing.
Not sure who's the "fanboy" here... I have started with a lot of scepticism when the 7D II was launched. Well, most of it washed off...objectively. This is a far better camera when compared with my (very good, I would dare to say) 7D. But, if your hobby is to decimate Canon's DR and other sensor-related elements, so be it, be happy! I only wonder if this will improve your overall photographic skills so that in a 1:1 printed comparison everyone can say: "Z, this was clearly shot with your Sony camera! All others are pure garbage Canon images."
mick232: Once people start getting laughed at because they are shooting with Canon gear, the alarm bells should be rining.
Can I have a laughable 1D-X plus a 200-400 f/4 zoom with 1.4x TC? Please, send these to me when you are ready to get rid of this laughable gear. Thank you. Highly appreciated.P. S. (Edit): pro gear + (real) mastery of the light = a pile of money
MikeFairbanks: When someone in sales/marketing starts flapping their gums with a bunch of adverbs and adjectives, it's fair for the consumer to say, "Get to the point."
My father used to say, "Stop beating around the bush."
Canon's executives are spending way too much time in meetings (the alternative to work), and this ad campaign shows.
Will it work? I have no idea. I'm no expert, but as a prosumer of gear it's not working on me. I find it annoying, condescending, contrived, and useless. But if it causes the average Joe to get pumped up and buy Canon products, then it will be a success.
Hype is a way to sell to the consumer who doesn't like to think or research. It's a way to assume (probably correctly) that most people are easy to manipulate.
And I agree with Canon (if their assumption is that people are easy to fool with hype). Look at the ebola epidemic. Right now there are people on motorcycles or on flimsy ladders worried that they might catch ebola, all because the TV hyped it.
I think... Too many "trigger happy" around. Because of this, in my opinion: instead of the new high MP, awesome DR sensor, they got...a MKT campaign. This creates cognitive dissonance.
Oh, you all are still here?! I have left yesterday evening, and to my surprise now I see...more than 750 comments. Wow... What a waste of time, in my opinion.P. S.: dealers have started to offer the 7D Mk II with the BG E16 grip for free - sounds like a good offer (almost 300 EUR saving), can make the camera (even) more attractive...
Don't care. The 7D II "case" is not "solved" yet, so after the reviews for this camera will start to pop up, I will move to the next topic. Eventually.P. S. (Edit): or, they might have some sort of breakthrough... This sounds rather like "We did it, so now please shut up. Thank you."
those samples seem to make Canon fanboys quite butthurt, no critics tolerated.. Try making samples with the 500mm F4 next time to convince them they still got the superior camera system.But "sssh", don't mention the price...
"...Try making samples with the 500mm F4 next time to convince them they still got the superior camera system."The sensor itself on 7D II is (or looks) better. Nothing to do with my 7D. Sony has great sensors, indeed, but not quite that "killing" difference that will make me swap the system, when you consider the 7D II package. Now, I ask only one thing from the 7D II sensor: usable files at ISO 6400. And good at 3200. If this will be true, that's it, I will buy the camera.
Thing is, I have used many camera SYSTEMS. Just being curious, you know. Here is my opinion: you are not right. At all. Nikon has a wonderful camera system (and I will say the same about Olympus), really, but to claim that the Canon system is inferior is a bit immature. And unprofessional, too. Fangirls & fanboys excluded here. And, btw, although I am not yet convinced, these samples are not bad at all. But if you want to make these look worse than in reality and this makes you happy, fine with me.
Hmm, interesting... Not quite the original 7D. But, RAWs will tell the (whole) tale...
fmian: 'Dual lens system for optimised film (6400dpi)'
Highly inaccurate and misleading.I don't know why companies can't list the true resolution...
OK, thank you, appreciated.